Packaging sysfsutils: static library?
Today I read about the upcoming architecture for kernel device files
. devfs is already marked obsolete (what a pity, I really like
it...) and will be replaced by an userspace daemon udev.
This daemon and also other userspace programs rely on libsysfs which
provides a consistent interface to the kernel device information file
system (called "sysfs"). It already works, sysfs itself is in the
kernel for quite a while now, and the package provides two executables
which make use of it. Thus it seems worth packaging. Adrian Bunk
happened to file an RFP  just today, so there is at least one
other person that likes playing with it :-)
Since this is stuff that will still change frequently and it is not
used by real applications yet, I think it is sensible just to ship a
static library and the two programs in a single package "sysfsutils"
now. When the interface stabilizes and the library comes to real use,
I would provide the full set of shared library, -dev and -runtime
Is it reasonable to provide just a static library? Policy 8.3 allows
it in principle, but since I'm not very experienced at this, I would
welcome any suggestions and your opinions.
Thanks and have a nice weekend!